The controversial move by the Defense Contract Audit Agency to more selectively perform incurred costs audits lacks an implementation plan, a time frame and performance metrics, according to a Government Accountability Office report.

Three years ago, DCAA’s newly installed Patrick Fitzgerald began refocusing resources and revamping audit procedures and training to stress quality over quantity. This type of triage meant raising by tenfold the threshold dollar amounts that trigger incurred cost audits of fixed-priced and cost-type contracts.

Though “this initiative appears promising,” GAO found, DCAA “has not fully developed the measures by which it will assess whether the initiative reduces the backlog in a manner that protects the taxpayers' interests. Specifically, DCAA does not have a plan for how it will determine whether key features of the initiative, such as the revised risk criteria and the revised sampling percentages, should be adjusted in the future.”

Efforts to reduce the backlog of incurred cost audits, the report said, face obstacles such as limited data and performance metrics. “The military departments have limited data on the extent and nature of their contract closeout backlog, and the Defense Contract Management Agency --which performs contract administration services for the Department of Defense -- is missing information that would allow it to identify contracts that it could act on,” GAO said. DCAA’s ability to meet its goals will depend on how many contract proposals are deemed high-risk and hence worthy of focus.

The Army recently announced a goal of closing more than 475,000 contracts by September 2014, GAO said, but it does not yet have the information necessary to know if it can reach this goal and does not have an implementation plan. “The Navy and the Air Force had not established any departmentwide performance metrics for contract closeout. In contrast, DCMA has established two agencywide performance metrics related to contract closeout that are regularly monitored,” the report said.

GAO recommended that DCAA develop a plan and improve its data on “over-age” contracts and that the services develop contract closeout data and set performance measures.

After reviewing a draft report, Pentagon managers agreed with the recommendations and DCAA said it would have a detailed plan by March 2013.

By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or
otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec.com does not monitor comments posted to this site (and
has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems
to be in violation of this rule.

Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.